Trade Michael Pineda?

Dave · June 30, 2011 at 10:22 am · Filed Under Mariners 

Turning comments back on for this post as a test since I know many of you will want to weigh in. Behave.

My newest post is up on the Brock and Salk blog, and in it, I advocate the team exploring a trade for Michael Pineda. Yes, seriously.

I realize that the thought of trading Pineda is going to sound crazy. He’s a 22-year-old flamethrower who is already a quality Major League arm, and the Mariners control his rights through the 2016 season. He’s the leading candidate for the American League Rookie of the Year, and a big part of why the Mariners have been competitive this season. But, for those same reasons, Pineda would attract a ridiculous amount of demand if the organization let it be known that they would move him for the right price.

The list of available starting pitchers this summer is weak and thin. There is no Cliff Lee on the market, and so teams looking to upgrade their rotation will be frustrated by their options. There are also multiple contending teams that are up against their payroll limits, and given their budgetary restraints, they wouldn’t be able to take on much salary even if they could find a player they coveted. Pineda solves a lot of problems for these teams, offering a league-minimum front-line starter who would be with their organization for years to come.

Read the rest over at 710sports.com, and the link to my segment with the guys should be up on that page soon..

Comments

131 Responses to “Trade Michael Pineda?”

  1. asuray on June 30th, 2011 10:49 am

    Agreed. I think Cinci would be willing to package Alonso, Grandal, Frazier, and Wood in exchange for something like Pineda and Carp. I’m not sold on Frazier, but he’s prb better than Liddi and we’re not exactly setting the world on fire with our current 3B mix. Grandal would prb be ready right as Olivo’s contract expires and Alonso could share time with Cust this year and go full-time next. Wood isn’t half bad either.

  2. murphy_dog on June 30th, 2011 10:50 am

    Outstanding idea. Move him now, before he gets to whatever number his innings cap is and goes home for the winter and the M’s are down a pitcher, and have gained nothing for him.

  3. ManifestDestiny on June 30th, 2011 10:52 am

    I was all itchin to get upset about even the prospect of trading Big Mike…but damn, that would be a nice package and make 2012 REALLY exciting as those 3 come of age alongside Ackley and Smoak.

    2012 OD lineup of:

    Ichiro RF
    Ackley 2B
    Alonso DH
    Frazier 3B
    Smoak 1B
    Grandal C
    Halman LF
    Gutierrez CF
    Ryan SS

    would be downright dreamy, and cheap too, which would allow money to be spent on swallowing Figgins’ salary and mayhaps finding an SP reclamation project a la Harden/Bedard/Webb

  4. lalo on June 30th, 2011 11:02 am

    Interesting idea, but i don´t like those prospects, Grandal is good, but Mesoraco could be much better, Alonso would be a decent DH, but you can sign a better DH without giving Michael Pineda, Travis Wood is not better than Vargas, and Frazier is Liddi 2.0, i like the idea of explore a trade, but not with the Reds, at least not with those prospects, Why can´t we get top prospects?, Pineda is great, maybe, just maybe, we can trade him to the Marlins, he´ll be very cheap for the next 5 years, so Michael Pineda for Mike Stanton?

  5. Xteve X on June 30th, 2011 11:03 am

    I wouldn’t rule it out entirely as crazy talk. Fans do forget how fragile pitchers can be. If the M’s were able to get a return like that absolutely they should consider it.

  6. Kazinski on June 30th, 2011 11:04 am

    The only way it could even make a little sense is if you resign Bedard to at least a 4 year deal. Because you don’t want to have to start over building the pitching staff again, and I think it was here I learned just how iffy pitching prospects are until they actually make it to the majors and succeed.

    If we can’t sign Bedard to a long(er) term contract by the trading deadline then he should be the one on the block. He is pretty close to this years Cliff Lee, and he ought to bring a decent haul. Questions about his durability shouldn’t be a big hurdle for a half season rental, and he is good enough to be a difference maker, just about the time a team should be shutting down Pineda.

  7. wtnuke on June 30th, 2011 11:06 am

    My heart stopped when I read the title of this post – don’t do that to me Dave! I had been advocating for trading Felix, but given the uncertainty surrounding young pitchers and that cheapness factor, I’m inclined to agree with you on this. I think we need to be aggressive in the right ways to build a team that can contend during The King’s current contract, and that probably means parting with some good players to do it.

  8. NBarnes on June 30th, 2011 11:06 am

    I think this falls under ‘of course they’ll listen to any offer, and of course there are offers that they would accept’. Is there a difference between that as the understood default state of affairs and ‘let[ting] it be known that they would move him for the right price’?

  9. Gritty Veteran Poster on June 30th, 2011 11:10 am

    It’s a VERY interesting idea. If another team is willing to “overpay” it could be fantastic for the franchise.

    It’s the kind of trade that would take a lot of guts for Zduriencik to pull the trigger. If it works out he’s a hero if it doesn’t it would hang around his neck for years. It’s a tough job he has.

  10. asuray on June 30th, 2011 11:10 am

    Stanton’s power, though massive, would be mitigated by Safeco a bit and his primary defensive asset would be nullified having to play LF until Ichiro retires. Given the number of holes this team has and the general weakness of our minor league position player depth, I’d rather get a return of 2-4 prospects with a couple being B+ or better. Alonso is top 75 (barely) and Frazier was top 50 before last year. Maybe Cinci would swap out Grandal with Mesoraco? Grandal has more power potential and is a switch hitter, which might make him a better fit for Safeco.

  11. lalo on June 30th, 2011 11:12 am

    Maybe we can get Grandal for Bedard, then sign a capable DH, and keep Pineda with the M´s! Frazier, Wood and Alonso aren´t great prospects…

  12. asuray on June 30th, 2011 11:14 am

    He is pretty close to this years Cliff Lee

    Disagree. We’d probably get more value in hoping that Bedard gets a nice free agent status so we could get compensation picks (unlikely given he didn’t play at all last year). I doubt Cinci, for the sake of comparison, would part with even one of the Grandal, Mesoraco, Alonso, Frazier group for Bedard. Maybe Frazier.

  13. florient on June 30th, 2011 11:21 am

    If someone is willing to over pay then why not. However, it seems like trading Bedard makes a whole lot more sense than this.

  14. Zeke on June 30th, 2011 11:23 am

    I do have to say, the comments on 710sports.com are a lot more fun to read. Bad Dave!! On topic though, a great hitting prospect has more value than a great pitching prospect, IMO. Thank goodness for Ackley.

  15. TumwaterMike on June 30th, 2011 11:28 am

    We need to shore up this offense. Any trade that makes us better and more blanced is alright by me. If its Pineda for 3 or 4 players that can help in the very near future then I’m all for it. His trade value is sky high right now. We have Paxton, Walker, Hultzen and Campos in the future.

  16. RRR on June 30th, 2011 11:29 am

    However, it seems like trading Bedard makes a whole lot more sense than this.

    I don’t understand the common belief that we can trade Bedard for A prospects. That’s not how it works. Other teams generally don’t over pay for injury prone pitchers who have had 3 good months in the last 2.5 years. Other GM’s aren’t stupid. They know what Bedard is- a great pitcher when healthy, who is rarely healthy, who probably can’t handle the scrutiny of a large media market.

    In real life it usually takes real players to receive real players in return.

  17. Kirk D on June 30th, 2011 11:29 am

    I think you’re right on Dave. We all get excited about young pitching studs, but the reality is that pitchers often break down. Pineda has an injury history, and without delving too far into the fuzzy area of biomechanics, it wouldn’t surprise me in the least if Pineda experiences serious arm trouble, sooner rather than later.

    Converting the commodity that is Pineda into more stable commodities like excellent young hitting prospects is a smart strategy if it can be done (and I think Dave’s right that many teams would provide a huge return in exchange for Pineda).

    The caveat to this is that such a move is unlikely to be viewed favorably by the majority of the casual M’s fanbase.

  18. EricL on June 30th, 2011 11:30 am

    However, it seems like trading Bedard makes a whole lot more sense than this.

    From the long-term Mariner perspective, yes it does make more sense to trade Bedard. But I don’t know that Bedard will EVER shake the “ticking injury time bomb” label he’s got right now. People won’t sacrifice future players for a guy that may implode on his next pitch.

    From the expected return in a trade perspective, though, Pineda would bring much more back than any pitcher in the system not named Felix.

    And if you could, in any way, turn one pitcher into at least two long-term positional starters, you’d have to think long and hard to say no.

  19. asuray on June 30th, 2011 11:31 am

    Too bad Montero’s not looking like all he was reported as being. I’m sure the Yankees would jump at the chance to overpay for Pineda. Montero, Gardner, and Banuelos for Pineda and something?

  20. sportsnw on June 30th, 2011 11:36 am

    After the initial shock of thinking Pineda had already been traded, I stopped and thought about this. Although I don’t think the hypothetical deal listed is one I would be that excited about, the concept isn’t half bad. It would have to be one heck of a trade to make it okay though, because with the M’s still having quite a few years of Pineda under control I would be livid if the team didn’t get some top level prospects in return.

  21. paracorto on June 30th, 2011 11:37 am

    This is perhaps the first time I agree with a Mr.Cameron proposal. Given Pineda contractual situation and the lack of great SP available that could land some very important pieces for Seattle – and not just another refugèe like Ludwick. May I propose to trade Smoak too ?

  22. asuray on June 30th, 2011 11:40 am

    May I propose to trade Smoak too?

    Why? You just supported the idea of trading a young, team-controlled, future ace for position prospects, now you want to trade our second best position player prospect who is also under team control?

  23. camerod on June 30th, 2011 11:41 am

    Didn’t Bedard get put on the 15 day disabled list yesterday? What does that do to his trade value?

  24. ripperlv on June 30th, 2011 11:45 am

    Dave
    I certainly respect most of what you say. However trade Pineda? Well, you do make a good argument that I reluctantly have to agree with. It just hurts so much too hear it.

  25. Snake Hippo on June 30th, 2011 11:45 am

    Not that I disagree with the idea, but position prospects aren’t exactly sure things either (Brandon Wood, anyone?) Pineda at least has shown the ability to have success at the major league level, something none of the proposed prospects have. Then again, that’s probably why it would be possible to get a return like that for a rookie without much in the way of a big-league track record.

    The concept makes sense in theory, but my heart is screaming NO NO NO NO NO

  26. johndango on June 30th, 2011 11:52 am

    Do it. I’m tired of only having a good feeling about winning a game based on who’s pitching. Once or twice a week is not as good as every game, which is something you could feel with a quality lineup. I say do it, and do it now before the kid blows up his arm. We have enough pitching prospects anyway.

  27. Edgar4Hall on June 30th, 2011 11:53 am

    if it doesn’t it would hang around his neck for years.

    If Jack Z screwed it up he wouldn’t have to worry about it hanging around his neck cause he would be stuck in some European softball league as a General Manager.

    As for the trade, Dave it hurts but I can see the idea with it and Z has a decent track record of trading Pitchers on this team in a bidding war or someone overpaying (Washburn, Putz, even Lee IMO)and as you stated we have arms that are close. So I could be ok with it especially now that it seems that some teams can hit him a bit better, even though I still think he will be an amazing pitcher.

    One thing I would stipulate has to happen first though is that Hultzen must be talked to, signed quickly and asked to finish school near the farm team he will be playing with. We need him to develop quickly if we pulled this off so he needs to be bribed to take this job that we offer him as soon as possible. He should be the first person signed out of this entire draft if we want this pulled off.

  28. Jay R. on June 30th, 2011 11:54 am

    I love the idea. On the Brock and Salk Facebook comment thread someone was bemoaning all the stars that the Ms have fed to MLB over the years….and his first example was Greg Dobbs. If Pineda is going to haunt us like Greg Dobbs has, trade him twice!

  29. asuray on June 30th, 2011 11:54 am

    Last year, when the notion was floated that the Diamondbacks were open to trading Justin Upton, who was also 22 at the time, a good portion of the people commenting on this site were ready to trade the farm for him. Granted, that was an established position player we were talking about, but I still can’t see how anyone who saw the discussion on trading for Upton could argue that we shouldn’t be open to the idea of trading Pineda. If you were willing to put a monster package together for Upton, chances are other teams would be willing to put a similar package together for Pineda.

  30. Edgar4Hall on June 30th, 2011 11:54 am

    Snake, I agree with you on prospects, just look at what has not happened with Cleveland’s prospects after the CC trade but we do have to take a chance.

  31. wilchiro on June 30th, 2011 11:56 am

    I don’t agree with the idea, but I think it’s a good topic for debate.

    Maybe I’m dreaming, but with a sufficient amount of cash coming off the books ($20-30 million), with this trade, the Mariners would have to consider Sabathia, if he were to opt out of his contract, knowing that he’s looking to pitch in the west. I’d also be happy with Prince Fielder with that kind of cash.

    C – Grandal, 1B – Smoak, 2B – Ackley, 3B – Frazier, SS – Ryan, LF – Alonso/Halman, CF – Guti, RF – Ichiro, DH – Prince/Carp/Alonso

    Or

    SP – Felix, Sabathia, Vargas, Fister, Paxton/Pauley/Beavan

  32. asuray on June 30th, 2011 12:00 pm

    Speaking of Upton, wonder if the D-Backs would trade Upton and someone like Matt Davidson or Bobby Borchering for Pineda and maybe Peguero?

  33. FELIXisKING on June 30th, 2011 12:07 pm

    I’m all for adding a boat-load of offense. Maybe I’m jaded because I’m sick of watching 8 inning, 4 hit, 1 run performances get squandered, but I want some damn offense. If you can fetch a mega-package that includes a ton of young, offensive tlaent, I’d pull the trigger. We already have our work-horse Cy Young with Felix (make sure he never ever leaves) and then build around Vargas and Fister. We could even to a trade and sign-back with Bedard this July and then this off-season.

    I think the bottom line is that to get a good deal of young prospect for the offense, someone is going to have to leave this rotation. If the price is right, sign me up.

  34. PackBob on June 30th, 2011 12:14 pm

    Pineda is the perfect trade piece. He could translate to immediate wins for a team that can score runs.

    The Mariners need offense and have nothing on the horizon now that Ackley has been called up. This could really be a win/win type of trade with Z’s scouting background.

  35. Ibuprofen on June 30th, 2011 12:15 pm

    I want to hate this idea so much but I can’t, because it makes for too much sense. Pineda is an awesome pitcher and great kid, and I can’t imagine that he’d like to leave his mentor King Felix, but if someone wants to overpay for him then I don’t think we should ignore that.

  36. darthbuhner on June 30th, 2011 12:18 pm

    If the Mariners (or any team) have learned anything, it’s that no player is untradeable. Any player’s future, even during their prime, is uncertain (Cough, Griffey). I’m all for blockbuster trades, but I’m highly skeptical we’d get decent offers, unless we can fleece someone like Cleveland and Baltimore fleeced Bavasi. As amazing as he is (and I’ve been more exited for Pineda than any Ms farm-grown prospect in 20 years), GMs also know Pineda is still a big gamble, even for the remainder of this season.

  37. greentunic on June 30th, 2011 12:19 pm

    I’m a bit nervous about King Felix though. His command has not been stellar this year. Do we think he’s gonna go lights-out second half like he did the last two years?

  38. mlathrop3 on June 30th, 2011 12:22 pm

    I disagree with most about trading Bedard. I think the most we would get for him would maybe be one good AA prospect this year. I say we resign him on the cheap for next year (although I believe his incentives this year have him making in the ballpark of $7mil).

    Pineda’s value couldn’t be higher right now and I would love to see someone in a Mariner uniform other than Ackley be able to hit the damn ball!

  39. IwearMsHats on June 30th, 2011 12:27 pm

    How about we get bryce harper instead

  40. Chris_From_Bothell on June 30th, 2011 12:28 pm

    This works, if you’re confident that the Ms have enough depth of starting pitching to absorb the loss (measure that how you want – WAR, “#2 pitcher”, whatever). And obviously if you’re getting multiple quality players back.

    The ability to do addition-by-subtraction alone, by plugging average, non-platooning players in at LF, DH, possibly 3b or C… it could make the difference this year without changing anything about the rest of rebuilding.

    If ever there was a case for the cliche “have to give up value to get value”, this is it.

  41. FelixFanChris420 on June 30th, 2011 12:34 pm

    Great article Dave, as some of the other posters have said, I want to hate the idea, but for the right package (and it would have to be AMAZING) I’d be able to get on board. Though I don’t think they should even consider trading him in the division.

  42. jkcmason on June 30th, 2011 12:34 pm

    Really? I don’t understand why you would do this? The players that you mention are quality players, but not one of them has near the potential of Pineda. If you are going to deal Pineda, you can’t ask for a return of major league average players. I realize that the Mariners have large holes to fill with LF, 3B and DH, but none of these players mentioned have near the potential of Pineda. Why trade Pineda when you could solidly fill one of these positions with a pitcher like Vargas or Bedard and work on the others with the $25mil we would have in free agency.

    I agree that Hultzen, Walker, and Paxton look like they could fill this void eventually, but Hultzen hasn’t even signed yet and Paxton & Walker are in A ball.

    You mention this being a weak trade market for SPs, but that would also make Bedard and Vargas that much more tempting. Trade one of them.

  43. FelixFanChris420 on June 30th, 2011 12:36 pm

    If they actually decided to do this, we’d have to get 2 starting players minimum

  44. spankystout on June 30th, 2011 12:39 pm

    Wow I didn’t ever really think about Pineda being dealt: But this isn’t a bad idea if you understand that the package coming back would potentially fill all three spots the M’s need most. It isn’t the most pleasing to think of dealing the best 22year old pitcher in the MLB–but if the return restocks the offense Jack Z has to listen.

    P.S. Can Dave turn the comments off on Brock and Salks blog? :)

  45. FelixFanChris420 on June 30th, 2011 12:47 pm

    Lol spanky…yeah the comments over on the BS blog are hilarious

  46. Paul B on June 30th, 2011 1:07 pm

    For me, if I was going to do this trade, it would have to be for a special talent.

    A group of prospects wouldn’t do it, unless it included one or more who were sure-thing-can’t-miss-ready-for-MLB hitters. A package of players who each project to be 1 or 2 WAR hitters wouldn’t do it, either, even though that might help the M’s in the short term.

    My reasons are that the M’s control Pineda for such a long time, and, if, as Dave said,

    The list of available starting pitchers this summer is weak and thin.

    is true, then there could be someone out there who would overpay for Pineda.

  47. The Ancient Mariner on June 30th, 2011 1:07 pm

    I remember back in the days of the MLBfans/Superfans/Fanstop M’s board one of the regular posters adamantly arguing that Seattle should trade Ryan Anderson. At the time, the rest of us thought he was nuts; later, I wished the FO had thought the same way.

    You’d have to be very sure of the players you were getting back to deal Pineda — not least because he’s the biggest ray of hope this franchise has had in a while, and losing him would be a gut-punch; Zduriencik would have to have a very strong sales pitch to keep the crowd from taking up torches and barrels of tar and marching on his office. But for the right deal, we could probably improve the team in the near future (and maybe even in the present) while also shedding a lot of uncertainty in trading a young pitcher for position players . . . and as much as I really want to see Felix and Michael recreate the D-Backs’ WS rotation in the near future, that would be a win.

  48. mearls on June 30th, 2011 1:10 pm

    Something like this has been rolling around inside my head ever since the M’s went with Hultzen in the draft.

    Are we in a market where young pitchers are overvalued? If so, this sort of approach might be an excellent way to take advantage of that.

    OTOH, shipping out Pineda would be an understandably hard sell from a butts in the seat POV. He’s a good story, and the M’s are just not bad enough to feel like they are in the race.

  49. asuray on June 30th, 2011 1:22 pm

    How about we get bryce harper instead

    Even given that Pineda has actually performed at the major league level, I’d still say Harper is light years ahead of Pineda on most prospect lists. Same goes for Mike Trout. There are a few guys out there that I doubt any GM would trade for Pineda, even in a 1-for-1.

  50. Snarf15 on June 30th, 2011 1:22 pm

    Interesting idea, but I’ll respectfully disagree and say it’s not going to happen. Why would Felix wanna stay after building this bond with Pineda who is a phenom. Yes I understand statistically speaking something bad could happen to Pineda but I’m just not down with trading him. Felix and Pineda are the guys you’ve scouted and raised here in Seattle who are loyal and I believe will get you deep in the playoffs and soon. Pitching wins games. Of course we suck at hitting but so did San Fransisco last year. (I’m not saying we are the Giants of this year, just that pitching is more valuable than offense)

    The thing I like about Z is his mixture of old school and new school scouting. He’s not Billy Beane who solely relies on stats and track records, but rather he takes the best of both philosophies and understands their competitivness and intangibles and I think he’s done a great job (Brendan Ryan is a great example, and I’m very optimistic about Hultzen as well). And because of that I think he looks at the way Pineda has handled himself and realizes he is a special piece of something great for years to come. That’s why he will remain a Mariner for at least a few years.

    For the record, I am happy the comments are back on. I totally understand people got a little out of control a few posts back, and believe it was right to turn off the comments. It’s nice when we can get back to constructive conversations as it makes the website a lot more fun!

  51. Mariner Fan in CO Exile on June 30th, 2011 1:36 pm

    Dave,

    I don’t often disagree with your thoughts on baseball moves. I also feel strongly that a front office that refuses to listen to offers for any player on the roster is foolish. That said, I probably need more time for this concept to sink in. I look around at all the teams that survive injuries to huge parts of their lineup and manage to keep afloat because of pitching. Our offense stinks, yes, but it really can’t be that easy to replace Pineda’s pitching contriubtion, can it? Pineda can easily go the way of so many others, but if he didn’t, the opportunity of the 1-2 Felix-Pineda punch in the playoffs is just exciting. A run saved is as good as a run created, right?

    Yes, you build a lasting team around solid position players. Pitchers are volitile. But he’s young, cheap, and has performed well at every stage so far. He may not have Felix’s upside, but I don’t think I would have advocated for this when Felix had half a season under his belt, and so can’t bring myself to do so now. Of course, you probably only suggest it because the M’s have Felix already.

    Tough call. But I need to hear more to buy the strategy. Part of me wants to ride this horse wherever it takes us and use whatever freed up payroll we have over the next several years to continue plugging holes. It might help to see a lay-out of which approach gets us contending faster given timelines in the farm system and expected free agents/available trades in the next couple of years. If I sketch that out, maybe it’s a no brainer? . . .

  52. Westside guy on June 30th, 2011 1:45 pm

    I think when people start arguing with Dave’s list of potential return candidates, they’re missing the point somewhat. Dave’s not saying “hey, Jack Z needs to trade Pineda for these guys” – he’s saying “Jack Z should make it known he’ll listen to offers for Pineda and see what comes up”.

    I have no problem with the proposition for the very reasons Dave specifies. The one problem Jack Z definitely hasn’t had is coming up with decent pitchers for this team. I’d take this a step further, though. I wouldn’t say trading Pineda or Bedard is an either/or situation – Jack should let it be known that he’s willing to listen to offers for Pineda AND Bedard (note that I’m not arguing those are even remotely equivalent).

    Heck, he should listen to offers for anyone… but unless he gets the entire Yankees lineup in return, Felix should be off limits. :-D

  53. 300ZXNA on June 30th, 2011 1:49 pm

    The package from Cincinnati seems to favor a bit more of quanitity over quality, if there was a possibility of a one for one deal, what would be a realistic return?

    Now that I think about it, this offseason I’d love it if the FO revisited the idea of a Justin Upton trade now that we appear to have pitching coming out our ears . . .

  54. MarinerFanMike03 on June 30th, 2011 1:53 pm

    I have been thinking about trading one of our starting pitchers. However it was never Pineda (thought invoking as it is) and more on the lines of Vargas or Bedard.

    Could we get anything of value for either of those two?

  55. msfanmike on June 30th, 2011 1:53 pm

    Texas traded one of their top young pitching prospects a few years ago (was it Edinson Volquez?) for Josh Hamilton. Initially, that trade looked to be fair to both teams. The pitcher had a real good first year and then got hurt. He hasn’t been the same since. Hamilton eventually won an MVP Award and led his team to the World Series. He has also spent quite a bit of time going on and off the DL, but the Rangers clearly won that trade. If the Reds have another Josh Hamilton and are willing to deal him then it would be worth listening to offers. It would have to be one hell of a package, though to trade Pineda. The concept of trading Pineda isn’t all that far-fetched, regardless of how unpalatable the idea sounds on its surface.

  56. DarkKnight1680 on June 30th, 2011 1:54 pm

    What kind of package could the Royals put together? They always need good, young, cheap pitching and they’ve got a bevy of top/mid hitting prospects. Something built around Hosmer or Moustakas plus a guy like Clint Robinson would be interesting.

    Robinson is blocked by Butler, and with Hosmer/Moustakas/Myers they can afford to give up a top hitting prospect in a deal for Pineda.

  57. Spanky on June 30th, 2011 1:59 pm

    booo! BOOOO!!

    I hate watching poor pitching and the M’s finally have a pitching staff that can go toe-to-toe with ANYONE in the league. And it’s not Jamie Moyer stuff (which was good and I love Jamie!) but…with every pitch you hold your breath and hope. With Pineda, you shout at your TV: “HIT THIS YOU YANKEE PIECE OF CR..!!!”

    But…the M’s offense is just SOO inept it is frightening! How many times can Pineda throw a great game and give up 2 runs and LOSE! That’s got to wear on you! And the farm system has already shot it’s wad. There’s nothing left this year and probably next year! So how long can we go on losing 2-1??

    So…I’m really conflicted on this! Everything has it’s price and if the right price came along…I would have to say yes I think.

  58. Auggeydog on June 30th, 2011 2:00 pm

    Pineda is a big strong young kid, built to take the abuse. His injuries in the past I would guess had something to do with his growth. I grew 11″ in 9 months and it is no fun. If he had a late burst his body would need time to adjust. I am not sure if this was the cause but could be. With his body type I do not see him being a huge injury risk. The two guys we have in the minors that have been mentioned could get hurt as easy or maybe easier, there is no gurantee. Hultzen is not signed, and has $20 mill reasons to go to Med School. We can’t count on him. So the injury argument can be turned around, there is no guarantee for any players, not even position players. Any of these guys are one play away from never playing again.

    RRR I read your comment and thought where is Bavasi when you need him making the decisions for another team. There are not many GM’s that last this long that make that many mistakes. That being said, I think Z would look at offers from any team for any player I just think in his mind there are some players that are not going anywhere. I believe Pineda is one of them. If we worry about them getting hurt we would trade everyone away. Why not look at trading Felix, his value is high too? I think we have a core that you build around, and keep them no matter what. We need to figure out LF, upgrade 3rd somehow, get a DH that can hit for power, and have a good long term C. There are teams out there that have players blocked in AAA or even AA by someone in the bigs. We need to be able to find them and make smart trades for them with guys we have blocked. If we can do that and be better next year then in 2 years have a good group of position players and a rotation of Felix, Pineda, Hultzen, Walker, and Paxton how would that look? I hope he stands pat and follows his plan. Make the team better with smart trades and FA signings. Before anyone goes off about the Figgins deal, can we really blame it on Z? Nobody could guess he would regress like he did. I say no way we trade Pineda.

    I did not look it up, but I heard Seager was playing some 3rd, anyone know for sure? He could be the answer there instead of being blocked by Ackley. That way we possibly upgrade that position on the cheap. If not he should have some trade value, or do we keep him because Ackley could get hurt?

  59. 300ZXNA on June 30th, 2011 2:02 pm

    I just remembered that Bavasi is now with Cincy. I say we call Bavasi up on his private line, work out a deal, then hope Bavasi can convince his superiors. Sure would be nice to be on the other end of a Bavasi fueled Bedard deal.

    Oh, and I also love the idea of contacting KC. They indeed have hitting coming out their ears . . . but not so much pitching.

  60. vern on June 30th, 2011 2:05 pm

    I love it! If we have all of this starting pitching we need to move it for what we don’t have: Position players who can hit. I love Pineda, and you have to read the market and get all you can when you have a scarce resource. Awesome post, Dave.

  61. IwearMsHats on June 30th, 2011 2:07 pm

    I wasn’t advocating a 1 for 1 trade of pineda for harper. Of course we would give up more. How about dragee for starters

  62. Auggeydog on June 30th, 2011 2:10 pm

    Dave if you read this far, I sent an e-mail suggesting you get volunteer mods for the comment threads. I am not sure if you read or paid attention to the e-mail. I think you would find it takes responsibility off you, and makes the site better. Something for you to think about. I miss the comments and would like them turned back on.

  63. Breadbaker on June 30th, 2011 2:24 pm

    I guess I’d divide my response into two parts. First, if, after the large number of trades involving starting pitchers that worked out for the seller (going back to the Langston deal, even, and the Johnson deal through Bedard, Colon, Halladay, Sabathia and both Lee trades) there is still in inefficiency in the market that overprices starting pitchers by failing to discount their value by the injury risk, then that is something the M’s should exploit. And if, in a particular case, that means moving Michael Pineda, I’m not opposed to it, even though my heart wants Michael Pineda to be inducted into the Hall of Fame in a Mariner uniform.

    I disagree that Michael Pineda needs to be shopped by Zduriencik for this to occur. At least how I understand it, the more successful teams look for what they’re looking for in the trade market and try to find packages that will meet their needs. No GM in baseball has to be told Michael Pineda is on the M’s roster. Let Jack find the players he really craves and then figure out how to get them here. If the other team says “that only works if you throw in Michael Pineda” and the deal is fair, fine. But Pineda is not the 2001-03 Tacoma roster that we wouldn’t touch because they were the core of a future great team (all Mariner fans will now cough in unison). He’s an actual major league player and a member of the team. The first time he should hear he’s been the subject of trade rumors is when the rumor is actually true and the value delivered would convince any reasonable fan that the deal is good.

  64. kmsandrbs on June 30th, 2011 2:24 pm

    1) If the comments on the 710 site are indicative of what was happening here, I understand why you turned them off. Sheesh.

    2) Yes, I had the same gut reaction of NOOOO!!!

    3) We’ve read articles on here before, I think relating to how much adding the extra win for a player goes up the more wins that person is responsible for (I know someone else can say this better than I). For example, two +1 win players are (generally) cheaper than 1 +2 win player and a +0 win player. If this is accurate, I’d want to get at least one player who at least projects equal to Pineda (and then some, given the arguments Dave makes about the dearth of SP). My reasoning is that some of the more slightly above average players could be ‘bought’ with some of the money being freed up in the next few years, but we probably won’t be able to affford acquiring top-tier players.

  65. wilchiro on June 30th, 2011 2:27 pm

    I wonder what the Yankees could offer up. With Jesus Montero’s recent “struggles”, maybe we could get him and another piece at a discount. If Montero could potentially play 3B or LF (since it seems as if he’s not suited to be a C), then even more marrier.

  66. bookbook on June 30th, 2011 2:30 pm

    Bold article, Dave. Z would have to be crazy bold to make this move right now. I’m not saying it’s a bad idea, mind you…

  67. asuray on June 30th, 2011 2:33 pm

    If Montero could potentially play 3B or LF (since it seems as if he’s not suited to be a C), then even more marrier.

    Reports are that Montero is not a passable catcher, and is suited only to being an average first baseman or DH. I don’t think he’s ever played third or the outfield. I doubt he has the range/mobility for either.

  68. lamlor on June 30th, 2011 2:36 pm

    DarkKnight1680- I was going to say something similar to this, but you beat me to it. KC was one of my thoughts along with say a Tampa or Florida. They all have great young talent and can afford to give up a lot more for a potential ACE. The good thing about Pineda is that he would be valid by contenders as well as non-contenders. The market would be wide open.

    With all that said, you would have to get at least one major league player back along with the prospects. Detroit for Boesch and prospects would be one suggestion.

    Always remember one thing, ‘Prospects’ is a term used for players that haven’t yet made it. While we all like the sound of the word when describing a minor leaguer, it still means little (see Clement, Saunders, Balentein, Moore, Reed, etc.).

  69. Badbadger on June 30th, 2011 2:49 pm

    I agree with kmsandrbs. I don’t so much mind the idea of trading Pineda (for the right package), but I’d like to see some real high-end talent coming back. No sense in trading him for people of a talent level we can afford to sign in the off-season.

    Overall, I’d rather trade Bedard for a good LFer and see if one of our minor league guys can pan out at 3rd.

  70. The_Waco_Kid on June 30th, 2011 2:58 pm

    This post shows the catch-22 of trades. Obviously, you listen and you try to trade whomever is most overvalued. I’m not familiar with those 3 players, but Pineda is about as close as you get to a sure thing. Only Felix is closer. I’d be reluctant to give up Pineda for any number of guys we think would be good. Maybe they’re sure Hulzten/Paxton/Walker will emerge as a strong #2, but this is a big risk. You hate to see a young pitcher traded. If we could pull something off that gets us players who improve our hitting now and will last, that could be good. Pineda for guys not yet ready would be a disaster.

  71. The Ancient Mariner on June 30th, 2011 2:58 pm

    Auggeydog: it’s been done before.

    And I’m glad to see KC and the Rays occurring to others as possibilities. I also still believe in Montero and wonder if the Yanks would surrender Montero and Betances (who’s about Pineda’s size) in a deal for Pineda.

  72. Joe C on June 30th, 2011 3:15 pm

    Auggeydog argued above that we should trade players that we have blocked for players that are blocked in other organizations. I’d argue that no one worth promoting in the Mariner system is blocked. My defense at DH is good enough to play in the big leagues (my bat is no so good though). If you’re arguing that a player is blocked, you’re forgetting that Adam Kennedy is our DH more often than not. If there was someone at any position in the system worth promoting, they aren’t being blocked. The Mariners simply have a void of position players. This needs to be addressed.

    You have to give something up to get something in return, so if that means giving up Pineda, you have to consider it.

  73. ndevale on June 30th, 2011 3:22 pm

    just for the hell of it, i remember (and dont have the time to research the article) a poll of GMs in the 80-s for a franchise player. As i recall, all but three wanted doctor k, dwight gooden. at that time i would have said the same. i saw him strike out 17 giants one afternoon. and in a way, in spite of history, i would still go back and do the same. that is to say, take the risk on one dominant pitcher, knowing that he could flame out, but also knowing that he could take a team all the way to the title.
    sorry, puncuation, etc, etc, dont turn the comments off on my behalf

  74. JH on June 30th, 2011 3:24 pm

    The ability to do addition-by-subtraction alone, by plugging average, non-platooning players in at LF, DH, possibly 3b or C… it could make the difference this year without changing anything about the rest of rebuilding.

    That sounds more like addition by…addition.

  75. JH on June 30th, 2011 3:25 pm

    Disagree. We’d probably get more value in hoping that Bedard gets a nice free agent status so we could get compensation picks (unlikely given he didn’t play at all last year).

    Compensation picks are also in no way guaranteed to exist next year. They’re going to be a hot-button topic in collective bargaining.

  76. GripS on June 30th, 2011 3:50 pm

    It would take a pretty huge haul to make that trade. I say no way. Pineda could be a Felix Hernandez caliber of a pitcher. We play half our games in a ‘pitchers’ park.

    The offer would have to be too good to be true for me to pull the trigger on it.

  77. Auggeydog on June 30th, 2011 3:57 pm

    Joe C a guy blocked does not mean today. Seager is one that could be considered to be blocked. When he is ready he will more than likely not be playing 2nd. If he can only play 2nd, he or Ackley will need to be traded at this point who do you think it will be? If you think only guys in AAA that are ready to called up can be blocked then we have a different definition.

    I am not sure what we have at 1st, but anyone playing there that is close would also imho be blocked. I can’t think of any position other than those two that I would consider to be blocked. Ryan is great on D not so much on O. If we had a true OF he would be in LF. Catcher seems to be a black hole. Have we ever had a minor league catcher that made it in the bigs beside Varitek? All the good ones for us have come via trade as far as I remember. I guess 3rd would be blocked because we have a slick fielding guy who hits in the .290′s for a couple years. He also signed a pretty big contract. Well we were supposed to have that, but I guess it didn’t turn out like that. LOL followed by a sad face.

  78. lamlor on June 30th, 2011 4:08 pm

    It would take a pretty huge haul to make that trade. I say no way. Pineda could be a Felix Hernandez caliber of a pitcher. We play half our games in a ‘pitchers’ park.

    I have always looked at it differently when talking about a ‘pitchers park’ To me, and I could be wrong, but I have always thought you could get away with mediocre pitching, see Vargas and Fister, because of Safeco so the need would actually be to get better hitters in order to compete day in and day out.

    Take Felix. He is an ‘A’ caliber pitcher so how much does the park actually help him?

    Career:
    HM: 3.17
    AW: 3.25

    Both in exactly 95 starts. He has given up 53 HR’s away and 51 at home. His winning percentage is better at home, but that is standard for teams to win more at home then away therefor pitchers percentage would go up as well (Vargas actually had a 2.00 better ERA at home versus away in 2010).

    Again, not arguing, just curious of that thinking when talking about an ‘A’ type pitcher like Felix or Pineda.

  79. lamlor on June 30th, 2011 4:11 pm

    Follow Up:

    Pineda, in a small sample size:

    HM: 2.44
    AW: 2.86

  80. Ichirolling51 on June 30th, 2011 4:20 pm

    Pineda to the Marlins for Hanley Ramirez and Michael Stanton? That is probably the only way I’d consider it, they’d probably have to throw in Sanchez or some other pitcher, along with a mid-level prospect from us. Or possibly to the Reds for Aroldis Chapman, and Joey Votto. Either way I would want two or more young superstar potential players back. In other words I don’t see it happening. Like I said, If we could get Hanley Ramirez, Mike Stanton, and Anibal Sanchez, I would also be willing to toss in Lidie, Beavan or some other mid-level player. But that is the only kind of deal I would even listen to if I were JZ, no interest in porspects, I would want young proven MLB players in return.

  81. Typical Idiot Fan on June 30th, 2011 4:20 pm

    Interesting.

    We were musing in spring training about trading Pineda then for something interesting, I think it came up during the Justin Upton talks. Now that Pineda has come in and established himself as a hot item, team controlled for a while yet, and cheap, Justin Upton sounds like selling low.

    Neat. As for trading him, sure, why not. As long as the price is right.

  82. stevemotivateir on June 30th, 2011 4:22 pm

    Never hurts to listen. Maybe you spark a bidding war, to the point where the return is just ridiculous? Maybe you even draw a third team into it, which would fill a hole better? Again, never hurts to listen. The Mariners would be in full control.

  83. hoiland on June 30th, 2011 4:31 pm

    I am just thinking here, but are the Diamondbacks another solid potential trade partner?

    Davidson, Krauss and Borchering are in their farm.

    Then you have Upton and Young.

    Pineda for Davidson, Young, and Krauss?

    Upton has a good size contract that might scare the FO away.

  84. Ichirolling51 on June 30th, 2011 4:33 pm

    Either way I think you’re playing with a double edge sword. If you trade Pineda for a bunch of hitters then you improve our offense over night tenfold. However, with Bedard due to become a FA, and the likes of Walker, and Paxton still a ways away, you weaken our pitching. Almost to the point where we’re the Mariners of the late 90′s all offense and no pitching, except for when our ace is on the mound (Johnson (90′s), King Felix)…

  85. texasmarinerfan on June 30th, 2011 4:37 pm

    There are 3 ways trading Pineda could go

    1. Pineda fizzles out like Mark Prior an the Mariners get their future DH, 3rd baseman and catcher from the deal, sort of like Phelps for Burner

    2. Pineda becomes the next Nolan Ryan and the Mariners get 3 new Jose Lopez’es.

    3. Pineda stays at his current level and the Mariners get a some good players for the future.

    If we do trade Pineda we must get in return,
    1. The best offenseive prospect out there (Harper)

    2. A few very good prospects who we can hold onto.

    3. Trade Pineda and Bedard to the Reds and also get Votto.

    That’s what I would like to see. However Jack Z knows who the best guys out there are and I trust any decision he makes.

  86. samregens on June 30th, 2011 4:40 pm

    Ouch, Dave you broke my heart.

    Trade Pineda? I’m sure I’m in the irrational minority, but I’d think I’d even rather trade Felix first.

    This is a raw rookie who came up and has been a stud and pillar in the rotation from Day 1. And from what I see, he has room to grow, it’s extremely exciting. (Well this is why his trade value should be phenomenal, I agree).

    And someone mentioned it above, but despite his history while still growing, his huge frame and body type seem to me advantageous in terms of being durable.

    The list of guys you listed who got hurt is an intimidating one (and of course well illustrates your point that pitchers are more risky than position players), but I think in terms of body type the majority are “smaller” than Pineda.

    Mark Prior, Scott Kazmir, Rich Harden, Dontrelle Willis, Oliver Perez, and Anibal Sanchez.
    … Stephen Strasburg, Mat Latos, and Brett Anderson

    I look at Pineda and think of Sabathia in terms of durability, but even better in pitching (and not as fat).

    I wonder if anybody has done a study on sizes of pitchers and their general durability?

  87. Ichirolling51 on June 30th, 2011 4:41 pm

    Do you guys think the Rockies would be willing to trade Troy Tulowitzky (spelling?), and Jhoulies Chacin OR Ubaldo Jimenez for Pineda and Liddi? Or just Pineda for Tulo straight up. As God knows there is no way in their right minds the Fish would be willing to do my aforementioned proposed deal.

  88. just a fan on June 30th, 2011 4:51 pm

    Dave’s proposal is probably the only way this could work. A club with multiple position players who are blocked with an abundance of solid starters, and therefore a club that might be able to justify “overpaying”.

    Obviously it has to be an “overpay” and I don’t know much about those Cincinnati prospects. But if we could land a Hanley Ramirez type contributor, plus some other pieces….

  89. Snake Hippo on June 30th, 2011 4:51 pm

    Marlins are not trading Hanley.

    Rockies are not trading Tulo.

    Reds are not trading Votto.

    In fact, [Team] is not trading [franchise cornerstone], period. That’s basically us trading Felix.

    That said, is it greedy to dream about trading Pineda to the Marlins for Mike Stanton? Man, that bat in our lineup…

  90. just a fan on June 30th, 2011 4:53 pm

    And just to clarify my last comment, when I mention Hanley Ramirez type, I’m thinking back to when he was dealt from Boston to Florida. I’m not one of those that would be expecting the current version of him. Just the prospect version!

  91. Ichirolling51 on June 30th, 2011 4:59 pm

    Good because the current verson is hitting like .220!

  92. hoiland on June 30th, 2011 5:00 pm

    Tigers are looking for starters.

    Avila, Boesch, and Castellanos? That is probably too much…

    **Nevermind, just noticed two of those guys will be FAs. I will stop thinking now.

  93. The_Waco_Kid on June 30th, 2011 5:03 pm

    I’d think I’d even rather trade Felix first.

    You can make the argument that Felix is a better option to trade, but he also might yield less, as he’s expensive and Pineda is cheap.

    It all comes down to what teams are willing to offer, for any player. It’d have to be one hell of an offer in this case.

  94. just a fan on June 30th, 2011 5:04 pm

    The M’s can’t trade Felix. What would happen to the King’s Court?

  95. Ichirolling51 on June 30th, 2011 5:11 pm

    “The M’s can’t trade Felix. What would happen to the King’s Court?”

    It would get raided by the Turks or Mongolians.

  96. TomC on June 30th, 2011 5:22 pm

    From the article:

    “in reality, the organization is better off building around position players than pitchers”

    Precisely. Smart trading – in any field – means exchanging surplus goods (i.e lower value to you) for things you need (i.e higher value to you).

    We lack talented hitters. We have a surplus of good pitching. Trade pitching for hitting. Keep doing it until you have surplus hitting and need pitching.

  97. smb on June 30th, 2011 5:22 pm

    Is it not conceivable that we can have a WS-caliber team within the next five years, and one with some staying power, just by staying the course, continuing to draft well and developing the talent we’ve got and will continue to acquire via draft and international FA signings? I just don’t feel like the cupboard is so bare, and we’re so bereft of impact players in the system, that we need to trade our shiniest new 6 karat diamond for a handful of new land claims that may potentially yield more similar diamonds, but may also turn into a massive load of pyrite. That said, I’d definitely listen to offers right now, but I’d also be more inclined to pull the trigger on dealing Pineda a couple years from now…if he continues on this career arc, I don’t think he’d command so much less in a couple years with a couple cheap club control years still ahead of him.

  98. eternal on June 30th, 2011 5:24 pm

    I would have to imagine that his workload limit (200ip?) would decrease his value. He’s no good if you can’t use him

  99. jordan on June 30th, 2011 5:31 pm

    Pineda for Tulo straight up. Make it happen Z.

    Haha, I can’t tell you how giddy I would be to see Tulo in a Mariner uni

  100. Snake Hippo on June 30th, 2011 5:39 pm

    Tulo is also signed with the Rockies through like 2020. Not gonna happen. He’s their Felix.

  101. cmonseattle on June 30th, 2011 5:44 pm

    Is everyone forgetting about Nick Franklin and Kyle Seager? Seager has torn up every level so far, and his start in Tacoma is extremely encouraging – 5 XBH in 6 games so far.

    My point is, its not like we are absolutely barren in position player talent. Let’s keep our Felix/Pineda at the top, just like the Giants did with Lincecum/Cain to get a ring.

  102. lamlor on June 30th, 2011 5:45 pm

    But he should have been our Tulo, Thanks again Bavasi!!!!!!!!!

  103. nvn8vbryce on June 30th, 2011 5:57 pm

    From Dave’s lips to Z’s brain – I think this trade should have happened yesterday. While my heart is screaming no, the Braves’ and Nationals’ series tell me that we need more offense and need to DFA some of the dead weight from the team.

  104. JH on June 30th, 2011 5:59 pm

    Pineda is a big strong young kid, built to take the abuse.

    Size and strength have virtually nothing to do with pitcher injuries. Weight has been shown to have a small correlation with durability, but not much of one, certainly not one that materially affects Pineda’s individual odds of staying durable. It’s absolute folly to suggest that some characteristic of an individual pitcher means he’ll be an exception to the rule.

    Nobody should ever be off the table. If the Rays called up and offered Longoria for Felix, I’d take it, then I’d attempt a backflip, then when I got out of the hospital a few months later, I’d go watch Longoria man 3B in Safeco. Pineda’s worth a ton, and it’d take a ton for the Ms to give him up, but if a team’s willing to offer a ton, it’s never smart to say he’s off limits.

    Grandal, Alonso, and Frazier would be a pretty great haul. Not sure if I pull the trigger, because I think Alonso tops out at about 2-WAR if he’s a LF or DH and I’m not a huge Frazier fan, but it’d force GMZ to think long and hard.

  105. bookbook on June 30th, 2011 6:29 pm

    Whether trading Pineda is the right path is dependent on several factors:

    1. What’s being offered
    2. The potential of other pitchers to fill in the void
    3. The potential (or lack thereof) of other position player options, internal or external.
    etc. (how likely is Pineda to master a change-up, stay healthy, etc. etc.)

    Since I’m not sure we have carte blanche to go full-hog rosterbation here, let me just say that it’d be a very difficult decision. Where it’s so much easier not to pull the trigger, it’s very unlikely to happen.

  106. JH on June 30th, 2011 6:33 pm

    Is everyone forgetting about Nick Franklin and Kyle Seager? Seager has torn up every level so far, and his start in Tacoma is extremely encouraging – 5 XBH in 6 games so far.

    My point is, its not like we are absolutely barren in position player talent. Let’s keep our Felix/Pineda at the top, just like the Giants did with Lincecum/Cain to get a ring.

    Nobody’s forgetting about Franklin and Seager. But Franklin and Seager aren’t going to solve this offense. Not by themselves, and not by 2012. Only Seager’s even got a decent chance to crack the 25-man by next year, and he’s just now starting to take reps at 3rd, where he doesn’t exactly fit the profile. Franklin’s 20, had a mediocre first half of the season, isn’t a lock to stick at shortstop, and may have just suffered a concussion.

    Pretty radical moves need to be taken to bring the Mariners from an abysmal offense to a decent one. Whether that’s trading someone like Pineda or relying on smaller moves and next off-season remains to be seen, but just about the only thing that’s certain is that we can’t rely on the talent that’s currently in-house to get us there.

  107. SonOfZavaras on June 30th, 2011 6:42 pm

    I don’t want to like this post or this idea, Dave. I’ve already gotten really attached to the big guy wearing #36.

    But, I’d be lying if I said I thought your post wasn’t well-thought out, or didn’t make baseball sense.

    It makes too much sense. I hate sense, sometimes.

    But I have a thought or two on the matter.

    Pineda’s never been asked to be an ace, and because of how few innings he’s pitched is being closely monitored. There’s a real possibility that he’ll face a shut-down for the year by September if his current innings keep up.

    Wouldn’t a team attempting to barter use those points as a way drive down the price on Pineda?

    Would a guy like Doug Fister make more sense to trade, as well as Jason Vargas? Vargas would need a team with a big ballpark (and Great American Ball Park in Cincy would kill his effectiveness, so that’s out)…but those two are going to become expensive sooner than Pineda and have much more replaceable skill-sets as starting pitchers.

    The return back for them would be lesser than what if we parted with Pineda, true. But with starting pitching at such a premium price, couldn’t we significantly upgrade our offense using those two as chips as well?

    I think the idea is solid, but I’m wondering if it HAS to be Pineda.

    I think we have something in that guy, and it could be extremely special. How often does a 22-year-old with such limited pro innings do what he’s done in half a season of the big leagues? And I love his mentality, always learning. He’s already got it in his head how bad walks can be, I’ve seen him more than once be disgusted that he gave up 3 or 4 in a start.

    He just gets it, Michael Pineda does. I’d be VERY, very leery of any trade scenario including him. And if done? Boy, it had best be the right baseball trade.

  108. hoiland on June 30th, 2011 6:43 pm

    Is everyone forgetting about Nick Franklin and Kyle Seager? Seager has torn up every level so far, and his start in Tacoma is extremely encouraging – 5 XBH in 6 games so far.

    My point is, its not like we are absolutely barren in position player talent. Let’s keep our Felix/Pineda at the top, just like the Giants did with Lincecum/Cain to get a ring.

    Seager is tearing it up, but he is blocked at 2nd. I haven’t followed him too closely, but is he viable at SS or 3B?

  109. Rick Banjo on June 30th, 2011 7:00 pm

    We’re nearly 300 games into gnashing our teeth over whether pitching and defense can carry a bad lineup. Trading Pineda would help this, so I reluctantly (because he’s damned good) agree.

  110. plyka on June 30th, 2011 7:49 pm

    Pineda is a high risk guy according to Dave. Let’s say that’s true. Do people truly believe that Dave, this board and ESPN 710 Seattle listeners are the only people aware of this information?

    Wouldn’t they factor this information into their pricing model of what they will give up for Pineda?

    Trades work only if both sides benefit at the time or they have a different idea of what is valuable and what is not. Also, as with any trade, it depends on what the other side wants to give up. If the Yankees wanted to trade Teixera, Cano and Jesus Monero for Felix, who here would say no? Nobody. But the list of prospect players i heard Dave talking about trading for didn’t really spark my fancy. I’m not in favor of giving up very high value players for 3-4 lesser value players. Perhaps it is correct that the 3-4 lesser players are “safer” but what you also give up is the high ceiling with the 1 player. It’s all about risk vs reward, if a team is willing to give you less risk for your high risk, be willing to bet that they are getting in return high reward for their low reward, otherwise why in the hell would they make the trade?

  111. Sports on a Schtick on June 30th, 2011 7:50 pm

    Dave rosterbates better than most.

  112. MrZDevotee on June 30th, 2011 8:00 pm

    No. Hell no. No, no, no.

    For the price we’re paying him, I’d rather trade Felix, or Guty, or Ichiro.

    I’d rather not trade ANY of them.

    But pitching is just too frail to lob around like it’s money we’ve just got to spend. A major injury to the King, and after trading Pineda, we’d be almost completely broke.

    There’s nothing we’ll gain from trading him that we can’t afford this offseason. Which is another consideration.

    Given the choice (and we’ve seen both versions in this town) I’ll take GREAT pitching with bad offense, versus lots of runs with AWFUL pitching.

    If we’re not careful, we’ll end up with BOTH awful offense AND awful pitching.

  113. rightwingrick on June 30th, 2011 8:00 pm

    No way, shape, or form do you trade Pineda…or Hernandez.

    You could get 10 “top prospects” for each guy, and every one of them would be about their age or slightly younger, and it’s likely you would not get their talent from ANY of the 20.

    These guys are now SURE THINGS at a very young age. Why would you trade for a bunch of maybe’s trying to hit (and probably missing) the same jackpot you just hit?

  114. groundzero55 on June 30th, 2011 8:11 pm

    Pitching is NEVER a “sure thing.” Pineda could blow his elbow out tomorrow. We saw what happened with Bedard. Good starting pitching is also more replaceable, and cheaper in my opinion, than offense.

    Given a choice, I’d trade Ichiro over Pineda or Felix, but that ship has sailed and he just wouldn’t draw much of a return anymore. We have FIVE dominating pitchers right now. Trade one for guys who can help the offense…I think it’s downright ignorant not to see the logic in that. Even if whoever is plugged into the rotation is replacement level…well, we would basically still have FOUR guys who are pitching at ace level.

    I’m too attached to Felix to say trade him but I think trading him would result in a greater plus for the organization seeing as we would have a ton of money freed up plus the haul of players we could get. Not just prospects, but major league ready guys.

  115. plyka on June 30th, 2011 8:36 pm

    I don’t know why you guys are complaining about the comments on 710. At least there the folks aren’t afraid to challenge Dave. On this website it seems more people are hell bent on agreeing with Dave Cameron regardless of what he says.

    I saw this article, for instance, linked to on the 710 website:

    http://www.ussmariner.com/2011/03/16/pineda-isnt-ready/

    I haven’t seen anyone link to it here. What was the response to why Dave originally thought Pineda was not ready?

  116. Dustbust on June 30th, 2011 8:45 pm

    Under no circumstances would I trade Pineda. The thing that separates him from the other pitchers you mentioned in your segment are size and attitude.

    It’s extremely hard to find an ace that would be an anchor to your staff; we potentially have three. We need 1, maybe 2, competent bats to spark this lineup. Trade Bedard, Fister or Vargas for an adequate hitter, and stay on course.

    I know this anemic offense has been torturous to but trading a pitcher of Pineda’s caliber seems a little extreme.

  117. lamlor on June 30th, 2011 8:46 pm

    I don’t know why you guys are complaining about the comments on 710. At least there the folks aren’t afraid to challenge Dave. On this website it seems more people are hell bent on agreeing with Dave Cameron regardless of what he says.

    Amen!

  118. wstanley425 on June 30th, 2011 8:50 pm

    What about 3-way trade:

    We get:
    Carlos Beltran, Yonder, Yasmani

    Mets get:
    Carlos Peguero, Chone figgins, (3rd piece from Cincy)

    Cincy gets:
    Pineda

  119. teddyballgame9 on June 30th, 2011 9:11 pm

    Can we please sign Yu Darvish during the offseason? I know there is a huge risk with signing Japanese pitchers, but this guy is a STUD! He’s much more polished than Dice-K or any other pitcher that we’ve seen. If we could manage to sign him, trading Pineda for a few high-level prospects would make much more sense too.

  120. SonOfZavaras on June 30th, 2011 9:12 pm

    What about 3-way trade:

    We get:
    Carlos Beltran, Yonder, Yasmani

    Mets get:
    Carlos Peguero, Chone figgins, (3rd piece from Cincy)

    Cincy gets:
    Pineda

    I think a 3-way could very well happen, wstanley425. The basic premise is solid enough.

    But why on Earth would the Mets agree to this deal? They’d be taking on a bad contract of ours as they unleashed their own bad contract onto us. And where would Figgins play for them?

    Only if David Wright was gone does this trade make any sense for them.

    Carlos Peguero isn’t enough of a “young player” for them to build with, either. Ergo, not enough benefit for the Mets to pull the trigger and get in on this rodeo.

    The Mets are very much in our boat- trying to build with younger players while escaping the weight of contracts that just didn’t pan out.

    It’s not a horrible trade outline, IMHO. But it blatantly favors us and the Reds.

  121. just a fan on June 30th, 2011 9:14 pm

    Four hours ago, a comment in favor of trading Pineda:

    We have a surplus of good pitching.

    Now, do we have a surplus of aces? We have Felix and Pineda. We have pitching depth, and God please allow one or more of Taijuan, Hultzen and Paxton become an ace, but we only have two pitchers who have dominated at the major league level.

    That’s why the M’s won’t trade Pineda.

    But it is a very intriguing idea, and I like the way Dave Cameron thinks outside the box.

  122. SonOfZavaras on June 30th, 2011 9:15 pm

    Can we please sign Yu Darvish during the offseason?

    We’ll have to pay an enormous posting fee just for the chance to talk turkey this off-season, teddyballgame9. And that’s IF we’re the highest bidder.

    Darvish isn’t a free agent of his own accord until 2014.

  123. Westside guy on June 30th, 2011 10:00 pm

    Hasn’t Darvish repeatedly thrown way too many pitches? He may not be a good risk.

  124. Auggeydog on June 30th, 2011 11:02 pm

    Trades work only if both sides benefit at the time

    plyka unless your name is Bavasi

  125. Auggeydog on June 30th, 2011 11:03 pm

    OOPS did that backwards sorr should be the otherway.

  126. JH on June 30th, 2011 11:13 pm

    Pineda is a high risk guy according to Dave. Let’s say that’s true. Do people truly believe that Dave, this board and ESPN 710 Seattle listeners are the only people aware of this information?

    Wouldn’t they factor this information into their pricing model of what they will give up for Pineda?

    That’s why Dave mentioned trading to a team that’s currently contending. Young pitchers are very risky for the long-term, but teams will pay a lot to get a premier arm to get them into the playoffs in the short-term. Pineda does that, and gives a good possibility of getting good future value. That’s why his trade value is extremely high.

  127. Smoakmonster on July 1st, 2011 12:12 am

    How about your out of your fucking mind you stat nerd

  128. Cresswell on July 1st, 2011 2:47 pm

    Here’s what I think. Pundits get bored and start coming up with dopey trade scenarios. No trading outstanding young talent. Period. This team looks great right now – better than the 1982 Twins and ahead of them in many respects. Chill.

  129. Typical Idiot Fan on July 1st, 2011 3:46 pm

    Here’s what I think. Pundits get bored and start coming up with dopey trade scenarios.

    Yeah, because Dave is so bored. It’s not because he cares about this team and wants to see it do well. No sir. Just bored.

    No trading outstanding young talent. Period. This team looks great right now – better than the 1982 Twins and ahead of them in many respects. Chill.

    Who gives a crap if we’re “better” than the 1982 Twins. Are they leading the AL West?

    There is nothing wrong with bettering the team in any way shape or form. You may not like giving up Pineda, but if he got us back players who were just as good, wouldn’t that make the team better overall?

    We all like Pineda and his potential, but at the end of the day (thanks Jack Z) he’s only one guy on a team with several holes. If we can get rid of one surplus item to fill needs, why in the heck shouldn’t we pursue that goal?

  130. OffensivelyChallenged on July 1st, 2011 5:28 pm

    I’d only take Ryan Braun.

  131. Jim_H on July 1st, 2011 7:34 pm

    I could forgive them for trading Felix at this point, and I honestly think that makes at least a *little* sense, but if they trade Pineda, I can honestly say I would not forgive them for a long long long time….

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.